WHY THE GENERAL INDIFFERENCE TO MAGIC HISTORY?

Discuss the historical aspects of magic, including memories, or favorite stories.

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 02:47 PM

Perhaps this question has been asked before, but Id be grateful to have your input on the following:

For the sake of this discussion, lets accept as correct the idea that a large majority of magicians (amateur and pro) take relatively little interest in the history and the biographies of the past greats of our art.

Lets also accept, for the sake of this discussion, that magic historians are not perceived by the rank and file in our group to be very important to the vitality of magic.

Why is that?

Is there a perception that knowledge of magic history is irrelevant to performing?

Is it that the magic histories and biographies published to date are boring/uninteresting?

What concepts or kinds of information would need to be communicated to prompt more performers to take a more active interest in magic history (or at least to appreciate that some knowledge of magic history is important), or to conclude that magic historians play a vital role in the health of our art?

For those of you who are not really interested in magic history, or dont agree about the important place of magic historians, etc., Id be grateful to hear why you feel this way, here or offline.

This isnt about being critical of, or judging, peoples perspectives on these issues. Its about learning the reasons for those perspectives and possibly learning how different approaches to communicating magic history and biography may foster greater interest and appreciation among us.

Many thanks for reading this, and I hope some of you will provide some valued input, here or by private e-mail. I will keep all private responses private.

I am posing these questions for a very specific reason, which I hope will become apparent early next year.

Clay

P.S. Ive posted this in two locations on GF in the hopes of attracting the maximum response, and hope the honchos will permit this bit of duplication. CHS
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 03:23 PM

Clay- Here is my humble perspective on your question. I may ramble, but read on. I have been in love with the history of magic since I was a teenager. I performed with doves for a while back then(the 70's) but it was the history that intrigued me. I stopped performing because performance didn't fullfill me the same. Even watching live performance, to this day, does nowhere near what discovering the history and collecting the antique props does for me.
Don't get me wrong, I love to watch the great classic stage artists like Mark Wilson and Lance Burton. Still it is history and relics for me.
My wife gave me a pair of doves last year as a Christmas gift thinking ot would renew my interest in performing. I spent a fortune on getting an act together and then dropped overnight. I am a collector not a performer. And conversely many perfomers are just not caught up with history.
I hope that adds some value to the thread.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 03:42 PM

In all honesty, I think people today are by and large out of touch with all areas of history, not just magic history, and it's getting worse. If something happened last week it's already forgotten.

Most people now days, if they've ever heard about WWI or WWII, or the Civil War they can't tell them apart, or discuss why they were important, or what happened.


If I may relate and anecdote:


I was managing a big restaurant in the East Bay (San Ramon, Northern california).
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 03:56 PM

If I may relate and anecdote:

I was managing a big restaurant in the East Bay (San Ramon, Northern california).
Wow. That's a very telling and interesting anecdote, Dave.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 04:10 PM

To be honest, I think people today are by and large out of touch with ALL areas of history, not just magic history, and it's getting worse. If something happened last week it's already forgotten.
I have often wondered how long it would be before all important info was forgotten by those "in power", and we would be back in the dark ages, because noone would even know what the dark ages were...

Most people now days, if they've ever heard about WWI or WWII, or the Civil War, or Vietnam, or Watergate, they can't tell them apart, or discuss why they were important, or what happened.
________________________
Another area I love is art history. As Picasso said, it's not enough to just look at an artist's pictures, you have to know where he was living at the time--who he was palling around with--how much he partied, etc....i.e., the more you know, the more enriched you will be.

Thus we come to an anecdote, if I may:
I was managing a restaurant in the East Bay (San Ramon, Nor. Cal.)
One of the guys who worked there was particularly hilarious, and had arcane interests like me.
One afternoon, we started trading stories about the wild times in Paris during the 20s--the scandals, the bon mots, the parties, the orgies, etc. etc. Two young buss-boys (in high school) came into the room where we were cracking up. We said, "Let us tell you this story about (I forget who: Picasso, Hemingway, ??)" they literally sneered at us and said, "What do we want to hear [censored] about old dead guys for?"

ABSOLUTE disdain even for the hilarious stuff specially picked by us--not even boring classroom stuff--they wanted NONE of ANY of it.

Here is an article that will be of interest to many of you:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 102407.DTL
________________________
I find many people don't have intellectual curiosity enough to read-about or seek-out information about ANY subject, not just magic history, unfortunately.

The average American reads zero books per year.

Say it with me, "Doomed to repeat it"... :help:
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 04:13 PM

For me, I don't see how someone interested in magic cannot be interested in its history. The characters, the stories, the development of modern magic...it's all so interesting.

Studying history has made me a better performer. While I was trained by one of the greats, I've learned from history. For example: watching a filmed performance of Frederick Eugene Powell was a lesson in acting when he vanished a glove. Perfectly natural technique and gorgeous in execution. No pulls, no magnets, nothing but pure technique. Very little magic of that level is seen today...and it's a shame.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 04:13 PM

This damned computing machine!! I must have pulled the wrong lever and posted accidently.

--Sure Lovick, start hassling me as soon as the gifts are in the mail!

:D :p
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 04:30 PM

Originally posted by David Alexander:
For me, I don't see how someone interested in magic cannot be interested in its history. The characters, the stories, the development of modern magic...it's all so interesting. ...
Part of living an examined life is comparing today to yesterday. Some folks took the trouble to pass on their accomplishments to those who follow.

Some may find it humbling to find that others have been in similar places and dreamed similar dreams.
Some may wish to live in a solipsist's bubble enjoying their discoveries as novel and their worries as universal.

What do you mean I'm not the first person to use court cards in an ace assembly?
:eek:
Guest
 

Postby Kevin Connolly » 11/02/07 07:15 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by castawaydave:
[QB]

The average American reads zero books per year.


I guess Amazon should pack up their tents and go home. :eek:

Tens of millions of books are read in the USA. You may want to re-adjust your average. :o
Please visit my website.
http://houdinihimself.com/
I buy,sell + trade Houdini, Hardeen items.
User avatar
Kevin Connolly
 
Posts: 2383
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Jersey

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 07:38 PM

Just mindlessly repeating a statistic I read elsewhere...Certainly MILLIONS of books are sold, but there are HUNDREDS of millions of people living in this country alone.
Everything boils down to a bell curve: MOST people DON'T read. Remember the old 80-20 rule?

Honestly how many non-assigned books do you think the current AVERAGE high-schooler (or college-ager) reads on their own per year these days?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 07:57 PM

Originally posted by castawaydave:
Just mindlessly repeating a statistic I read elsewhere...
Learning can be much more than the process of acquiring an ability to mindlessly repeat or regurgitate data.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 08:06 PM

Au contrere: rote memorization is where it's at!
Guest
 

Postby Kevin Connolly » 11/02/07 08:14 PM

Well, the Borders, Barnes & Noble, etc. should have been converted into parking lots by now. I think you generalization just doesn't have merit.
Please visit my website.
http://houdinihimself.com/
I buy,sell + trade Houdini, Hardeen items.
User avatar
Kevin Connolly
 
Posts: 2383
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Jersey

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 08:21 PM

If someone did a DVD on magic history then maybe more would get interested. Ask the magic dealers what the percentage is of books to video sales. I don't know personally but I can guess they sell more videos.

I know that with myself I had to reach a level of maturity before I realized how important the history is.

Tony Brent
Outta Control Magic Show
Orlando
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 08:34 PM

Originally posted by Tony Brent:
If someone did a DVD on magic history then maybe ...
Wasn't there a TV show in two parts about the history of magic?
Guest
 

Postby Charles McCall » 11/02/07 08:38 PM

There are several introductory DVDs on magic history available. Try the PBS one titled "The Art of Magic," or the series, " Grand Illusions: The Story of Magic."
Charles McCall
Charles McCall
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 01/20/08 01:00 PM
Location: Bakersfield, CA

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 09:26 PM

Hi Kevin (and Mr. Townsend)--I WILL try to remember and locate the source where I read that.

Of course, as book lovin' guys, it is hard for us to believe there are millions of people who don't read, have never read, some who maybe don't even know what a so-called "book" IS.

Needless to say, of course, I am a cynical jerk, and my bloviating is based not only on the obvious pea-brainedness, and further-colored by my worry that the world may, in fact be, going to Hell in a handbasket--BUT:
If we're trying to answer the question in Tustin's post, what I have said above would at least rate a slice on the pie-chart of explanations. It is not wacky fantasy crap. Crap, maybe, but crap within the realm of possibilities. You've GOT to at least give me THAT...(choke, cough...)

Now, instead of picking my nits, as delicious as it is, why not chime in on the original question?

[I love you guys. :D :whack: ]
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 09:43 PM

Originally posted by Magicam:
...

[b]What concepts or kinds of information would need to be communicated to prompt more performers to take a more active interest in magic history (or at least to appreciate that some knowledge of magic history is important), or to conclude that magic historians play a vital role in the health of our art?

... [/b]
... and somehow compete for attention with the floods of data readily available online and for free which offer the how to of the latest trendy tricks and classic books/videos ...

At a guess, aside from preaching to the choir it may require some accessibility and connection to what is happening in the world as experienced to be perceived as relevant.

All that and manage not to succumb to a Borgesian agenda where a fiction like Tlon accretes around agendas and winds up replacing the historical with the mythical. Seems almost fitting given the nature of our craft.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 10:46 PM

Part of what califmagic originally posted:
... I have been in love with the history of magic since I was a teenager. I performed ... but it was the history that intrigued me. ... I hope that adds some value to the thread.
Thanks, Scott, it does indeed add value. In my experience, its rare for a teenager to be drawn sua sponte into magic history. Do you recall what triggered it? Why has magic history intrigued you? Just curious, if you have the time to elaborate.

Also (and this is a question for all, really), what do you think might be a good way to get young magicians interested in magic history?

David Alexander wrote, in part:
.... ... Studying history has made me a better performer.
David, thats an excellent point (when I sat down some time ago and made a list of reasons a performer should be a student of magic history, that was at the top).

Tony, alas, you may be right in this ADD/MTV age, but as Charles points out, there are those kinds of things available maybe they need more publicity?

castawaydave begged the following:
... Now, instead of picking my nits ... , why not chime in on the original question?
Yes! Please! (Although Im not in any position to scold off-topic or straying-from-the-point posts, cause Ive done it myself here too many times to count.) By the way, Dave, its not Tustin, its Mr. Tustin to you...

And JT, if one of your points is, make magic history relevant, I could not agree more. But the question is, how? I think David Alexander gave us a wonderful "how" idea. The rest of your post Im afraid I dont understand, my friend.

Clay
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 11:00 PM

Originally posted by Magicam:
...I think David Alexander gave us a wonderful "how" idea. The rest of your post ...
The "how" is dependent upon access to the "who" in our community. It's getting to the rest of the community which lacks both mentorship and a classical education which looks to be a serious challenge.

There is a separate problem of how to achieve relevance in an environment almost saturated with free online magic data.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 11:00 PM

I think that if you profess to love our art form (or any artform), then surely - as a matter of 'completion' - you'd want to know about its history.

I think that some magicians get involved in magic for the initial 'I can fool the pants off you' thrill. They have no notion or desire to go further than that. They BUY (not learn/practice) an easy-to-technically-do trick...and they are off and running. Easy!! You CAN'T, however, do the same with ANY other major artform. E.g., You can't easily become a singer, dancer, actor, painter etc., etc...

So, sadly, magic attracts some fly-by-nights. And, in my humble opinion, fly-by-nights don't give a toss about what came before. Of course, not all magicians who don't care for the history are fly-by-nights, but I hope you see where I'm coming from.

Now, some magicians 'get their fill' of history if they subscribe to various magazines. In The Magic Circular, for example, there is always a history piece...

Now, I have written three memoirs/biogs of three good (but not 'major league') magic 'names.' All three sold well..but, I don't think many youngsters bought copies. Maybe these youngsters will be more interested as they get older. I think some will... I did!!

But, it's like doing lectures. When I lecture, I'd rather teach nuances, patter, presentation, the business etc., etc. But, for the most part, all I hear is, "We want more tricks!"

Shut up, Paul. You are rambling...

Paul Gordon
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 11:07 PM

I also think that, in addition to the study of technique as described by David Alexander, magic's rich history can provide inspiration to enrich performances in other ways. The rediscovery of long lost effects powered the performances of many great magicians, including Chung Ling Soo and Houdini. The history of magicians offers a wealth of material that can be woven into patter and presentation, as anyone who has seen Ricky Jay at work can attest (think of his invocation of Hofzinzer or his account of Dai Vernon and the center deal). Many magicians, like Harry Anderson, make effective use of gambling history in their presentations. And one need only think of the millions that David Copperfield has spent acquiring magic libraries, magician ephermera and antique equipment to realize that there must be some performance value to all that history.

Gary
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/02/07 11:20 PM

Clay,you could say I was a book worm/geek. I was reading US and World history even before I was a teenager. When I discovered magic and first read Milbourne Christopher's Illustrated History of Magic I was hooked. I am also an artist and the combination of those early posters and images of ducks and rabbits blended with history was irresistable. The appeal is still addictive. The fabulous early tole and brass props and fine woods. Black and white and sepia theatrical images are really powerful. Having said all this, the truth is, you cannot make the proverbial horse drink. The reading habits of youth today are dismal as Dave says. His story and the link to that article in the SFO news was depressing. I think similar admonishments are made of each generation. But this time it's pretty bad. We can only hope to preserve what there is and try to inpsire. This Genii Forum is an excellent tool and maybe it's the state of the art that youth will be led to it and be inpsired to the history of magic. I think it will take historians like you to carry that burden.
Guest
 

Postby neil.kelso » 11/03/07 03:58 AM

What an interesting discussion!

Being very interested in the history of the art, I'm only guessing, but I wonder whether some magicians steer clear of history because they can't see it's relevance to themselves or today's audiences?

Obviously inspiration can be drawn from anywhere, but perhaps it takes a little less investment to learn from people in similar situations to ourselves than those who lived and worked in different places in different times.

Neil
neil.kelso
 
Posts: 18
Joined: 01/26/08 01:00 PM
Location: Southampton, UK

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 09:02 AM

One of the other problems facing us is the idea of magic becoming common. When I was a kid if you wanted to be a magician you had to work at it. Magic books were no easily obtained. Books and tricks were bought at a brick and mortar store or through a catalog. Some magic titles were available at libraries, but not all titles were.

Back then you learned by self-study through books or individual tricks; by input from peers and older members of local clubs; and if extremely lucky, via a mentor...mentors varying in talent and experience.

Back then, getting an education in magic took time, effort, and to really advance, the development of social skills. To learn from others meant learning how to be courteous and respectful, how to interact well with others. The Internet has changed all that.

In the Internet Age much of that socialization process is no longer present. "Publishing" is cheap and easy, the motivation to publish is not making a contribution to the literature of the art, but to show how clever one is...think the thousands of awful YouTube videos of people who have no clue about what they're doing.

Study is too often replaced by watching a DVD and replicating what is seen, giving a marvelous monkey-see, monkey-so quality to much in magic today. (I actually knew one young mentalist who used several highly inappropriate lines from Bob Cassidy, not understanding that Bobs audiences were found in biker bars.)

Today, unfortunately, the curious will have an erroneous impression that all magic secrets are available on demandfor free with a few clicks of their mouse.

The Internet feeds the flighty curiosity of young people and reinforces the idea that old is bad and new is good. Paul Gordons experience lecturing, giving nuance, presentation, etc., being met by We want more tricks, is sadly typical as I understand it.

(As an aside, I will remember Pauls description of his lecture and make it a point to attend one whenever possible as thats the sort of lecture I think is most valuable and the least seen. Anyway, I digress)

The amateur is in this for self-entertainment, which is fine. For them magic is a pastime, a fun activity to take them away from the hum-drum of their day-to-day lives. Ive met amateurs who do little more than perform in front of a mirror for their own amusement. The study of history isnt for them, even though it would bring their hobby alive and give it relevance. They are dabblers.

Then theres ego. Unfortunately, a number of amateurs (and wannabe professionals) have a fantasy that they must be original and that they must invent everything they do. Without a clear study of magic history, they are doomed to endlessly reinvent the wheel and work far harder than they need to if they want to be original.

Some times that attitude is laughable. I once offered to teach a routine to a young wannabe pro and he turned me down saying he "wanted to work up his own routine." Apparently he thought something that had been used professionally for 40+ years (and had a fanstastic pedigree beyond that) was something he could ignore.

But back to the subject at hand - as far as I'm concerned, for a variety of reasons, the study of magics rich and varied history is a necessity if you want to be a well-rounded performer, if you want to call yourself educated in the craft.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 09:14 AM

Ill describe what Powell did that impressed me. He removed a glove, apparently placed it in his hand, reached for his wand, tapped the hand with the glove with the tip of the wand and the glove was gone.

Pure technique. The placement of the glove into the hand was a fake with the glove retained in the hand and dropped into a servante as the wand was obtained. The vanish then ensued. Perfect and highly magical and certainly as good as any Oscar-winning actor's "modern" technique.

The old pros knew the primary secret of a good magical presentation: massive and unrelenting attention to detail. Powells vanish of the glove is a great example of reducing an effect to its bare minimum, both in effect and method. Today, with the aptly described ADD/MTV generation, everything must be done quickly. Get to the next thing before the audience gets bored.

Simply put, thats [censored], regardless of what the idiots who produce television today might say. It is the job of the performer to engage the audience, attract and command their attention and go from there. If you dont understand that, you dont belong on a stage.

Powells presentation, learned and appreciated by a study of history is one of the things that has made me a better performer.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 09:42 AM

When "old" is proffered with presuppositions and "history" is tainted with condescension...

What can you expect from those who simply don't want that poisoned apple?

Have a look at this video clip on YouTube and maybe the discussion on the magic cafe here . If that's the way "history" is presented by some, maybe folks are just avoiding abuse?

By way of counter example consider those like Sol Stone who sometimes offer what's helpful to those who appear open to assistance yet who also keep their transactions positive and supportive in general - becoming a community resource who happens to also make the history available.
Guest
 

Postby George Olson » 11/03/07 12:43 PM

I must concur with everyone: to wit: relevance is history; history is irrelevant. The battle cry fans and opponents of the book: the deliberate dumbng down of america. By Charlotte Thomson Isberbyt

I dont want to come off as a nay sayer but with the egocentrisim pushed at all levels of Media, Government, and Education et al we reap what we have sowed.

The Washington Times had this review of the Book:
Deliberately dumb
"Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt's new book, ' the deliberate dumbing down of america' is without doubt one of the most important publishing events in the annals of American education in the last hundred years.
"John Dewey's 'School and Society,' published in 1899, set American education on its course to socialism. Rudolf Flesch's `Why Johnny Can't Read' published in 1955, informed American parents that there was something terribly wrong with the way the schools were teaching children to read ...
"But Iserbyt has done what no one else wanted or could do. She has put together the most formidable and practical compilation of documentation describing the well-planned 'deliberate dumbing down' of American children by their education system.'" Samuel L. Blumenfeld, writing on "Deliberately dumbing us down," Dec. 2 on World Net Daily at worldnetdaily.com

My daughter is an Art Historian and she and I discuss the validity of history in a modern world and why it is necessary for the survival of the world.
Here is an example:
http://deliberatedumbingdown.com/pages/reviews.html
How many of us take Jon Rocherbaumers lead when he mentions a book hes just found in his musings. Its always a good read, amusing, distressing, probing, and entertaining. (And usually not directly related to the latest trick)
The never ending argument pro and con BOOK vs. Videos.
Your question is well asked, but I am afraid you preaching to the choir!
GO
George Olson
 
Posts: 980
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Tigard, OR

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 12:45 PM

Watching Powell perform must have been a bit like seeing Alexander Herrmann perform. I'm envious.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 12:56 PM

Originally posted by George Olson:
I must concur with everyone: to wit: relevance is history; history is irrelevant. ... I am afraid you preaching to the choir!
GO
George, how do you think folks here would take to Bruce Stirling's suggestion that the notion of a "future" , relatable in the same way as our shared past, may also be on shaky ground?

Dumbing down? What do we say when when Hoffman and Lieber and Borges are not remembered and current explorers in the realm of fantasy including Pullman, Gaiman and Moore are unread?

Has semiotics become the study of "x for idiots" rather than how our best efforts to communicate with each other produce artifacts which reflect/encode our culture?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 01:37 PM

Guys ... ?

GUYS!!!

Lord knows I share many of the laments posted herein, and the exchanges here have their interest and relevance, but do we have to fly at 30,000 feet to address these questions and related issues, or conversely study the deepest roots?

Threads take on their own lives, so I guess why should this one be any different? But I really was looking for more down-to-earth comments in response to the original post, such as Davids with his Im a better performer for studying the past masters comment.
Guest
 

Postby Kevin Connolly » 11/03/07 01:45 PM

Oh Well. [censored] Happens! :eek:

Maybe you'll get what you want in your duplicate thread. ;)
Please visit my website.
http://houdinihimself.com/
I buy,sell + trade Houdini, Hardeen items.
User avatar
Kevin Connolly
 
Posts: 2383
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: New Jersey

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 02:09 PM

The Powers That Be deleted the duplicate thread.

Sorry for being such a scrooge, all, but there is some time sensitivity to my questions. Anyway, it's like Kevin says with his first point, and so if kickin' and whinin' doesn't get me my way, might as well enjoy the ride! :cool:
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 02:27 PM

The basic problem was discussed in Swift's Battle of the books.

How, specifically do we expect to reach out to those discussed earlier and those who have little background in literature or history from which to draw?

Originally posted by Magicam:
...to appreciate that some knowledge of magic history is important), or to conclude that magic historians play a vital role in the health of our art?...
vital or even relevant to who? Who's the audience? The converted? The choir? Why would other folks care how much we know till they know how much we care (about them)?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 03:02 PM

Originally posted by Eric Fry:
Watching Powell perform must have been a bit like seeing Alexander Herrmann perform. I'm envious.
Fortunately, I'm not that old, althought I did spend an afternoon with Edwin Brush who saw Herrmann twice when Brush was 17. That was exciting to hear him describe what he saw.

I saw Powell perform in a clip in, I believe, the SAM Film Library some years back.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 03:04 PM

I would point out to my friend Clay that indifference to history is not solely the province of amateur magic. The general population of the US is pathetically devoid of any knowledge of history. One survey of high school seniors put a high percentage of them thinking and FDR was President during the Vietnam War.

Many of them know what is current in pop culture and little else before they were 10 years old.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 03:17 PM

Magic historians are highly valuable to the craft. Eddie Dawes immediately springs to mind as one of our treasures. His books are a wonder. I've read and re-read his books on Stanley Collins and Charles Bertram several times, enjoying them with each new visit.

It is interesting to contract and compare success in other fields. Often you'll find the guiding principles are the same.

I was just watching the BBC program, "Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares" where Gordon does his best to rehabilitate a failing restaurant. Sometimes he succeeds and sometimes he doesn't. His solution to the food problem is always the same: fresh and simple. The dishes may vary from restaurant to restaurant, but the basic approach - fresh and simple - never varies...and, when his advice is followed, the restaurants are successful. When they lapse into overly complicated dishes, they fail.

The same is true in our odd little craft. Keep the effects and the methods simple and the presentations fresh and you have a winning combination.

As a current example - Harry Lorayne talks on another thread about his Pecking Bird routine that he was doing in the late 1940s. Harry perfected his presentation through many hundreds of performances. He got every bit of entertainment out of it that he could. Once perfected he used it all the time. No need to continuously hunt for something "better."

This is the attitude of the pro who develops a repetoire of material that works. He then markets his entertainment services with that material and makes money.

The amateur is always looking for "better" and never spends enough time perfecting a routine because he thinks there's always "better" down the road or around the corner.

It takes far more work to do what Harry did, but you end up with far better and commercial material. Take a lesson from Harry and do likewise.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 03:28 PM

Magicam:

This is a very interesting and important issue not only for the importance about the History of magic but for the importance in the history of all different genre's.

It is my opinion that history is important... but only to an extant. Depending on where we'd like to go, we must first analyze what resources are needed in order to get to where we'd like to be. I.e., if I'm looking for a way to improve how I control a card to the top, I will do research (i.e.: "Card College") for that particular move. However, it would be time consuming and impractical for me to read the whole "Card College" series just for the sake of knowing.

My point is, people say "Knowledge is Power," but I say to you it isn't. Only APPLIED knwoledge is power. If we know we're not going to use something productively, why study it? I will bet, that all of us in this forum do not remember 70-80% of we've learned in school. Why? Because it does not contribute to our objectives. To passively study something for the sake of studying is truly wasting time when we can be focusing or actually taking action towards something that contributes to our purpose.

Lastly, there is one exception to this rule! If you truly enjoy studying history for pleasure during your off time, then why not? I am a teacher, but I have a passion and interest for magic, so why not practice and perform it during my off time!

But again, as far as history always being important, it's not always important especially when you don't have a passion for it or just simply don't NEED it.

Take good care everyone.

Anthony R.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 04:08 PM

To David Alexander: I had overlooked you said you saw a FILM of Powell. Still, even a film like that is a fascinating window on yesteryear. What would we give for Herrmann to have lived 20-30 more years and been filmed?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 11/03/07 04:33 PM

Originally posted by AnthonyR:
... If we know we're not going to use something productively, why study it?
The younger you are, the less you know what knowledge you will and won't use.

And "young" is a state of mind.
Guest
 

Next

Return to Magic History and Anecdotes